114
   

Where is the US economy headed?

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2010 05:02 pm
@okie,
Your facts are looked at in isolation. Think global.
okie
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2010 07:38 pm
@cicerone imposter,
Earth to ci, we are talking about the United States government's Internal Revenue Service income tax code, as applied to citizens of this country paying their taxes. This is not a global issue. It is a domestic issue to be determined by us here in this country, and we are talking about accurate reporting of this issue by the press.
talk72000
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2010 08:24 pm
@okie,
What GWB has done became global. There is a global recession if you are not aware.
okie
 
  0  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2010 09:50 pm
@talk72000,
talk72000 wrote:

What GWB has done became global.

We would do well to clean up our own house, talk.
Here is an interesting graph as follows. Note the drastic rise following Bush's last year in office.
Question, how come White house estimates are always lower than the CBO estimate? And the discrepancy worsens the further out you go. By 2019, the Whitehouse is off by almost half of the CBO. Is this a little like their prediction, I think I remember this right, that unemployment would stay under 8% if they got their stim bill passed?
http://blog.heritage.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/wapoobamabudget1.jpg
talk72000
 
  0  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2010 09:55 pm
@okie,
Obama got in while the economy was plummeting.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 12 Nov, 2010 10:41 pm
@okie,
So did I, but you missed the whole thesis. Tax codes have been developed by both the republicans and democrats, so what's your beef? If you're against what the republicans are doing, please point those out. If you're complaining that the media isn't doing their jobs, you can always complain to FOX News, your primary media.

What's your beef, exactly? Your so-called facts are meaningless. You must learn to live in the real world; not what you expect from how government makes laws about taxation, and how the national media doesn't meet your requirements on reporting.

Complain all you want, but it only shows how stupid you are. You're also complaining about your own party and media.

Those are the "real" facts.
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 01:52 am
@cicerone imposter,
It was parados that said that there was NO legislation that Obama signed that raised any kind of taxes.
I just proved otherwise.
parados
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 07:46 am
@mysteryman,
Quote:
It was parados that said that there was NO legislation that Obama signed that raised any kind of taxes.

I said no such thing.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 10:39 am
@okie,
Talking about cleaning up our "own" house, tell that to the 25 million who don't have jobs. GW Bush is responsible for the worst job creation since Hoover. You do know who Hoover is, don't you? You have also heard of the Great Depression and the Great Recession?
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 11:05 am
@cicerone imposter,
Obama
0 Replies
 
mysteryman
 
  0  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 02:39 pm
@parados,
Are these your words?

Quote:
What Obama tax increase?
Please cite the legislation Obama signed that will raise taxes.

I think you are confused about who passed the legislation and who signed it. The GOP did. You can't blame Obama for a bill he never signed and never voted on


So you did say that Obama didnt sign any bills that raised taxes.
I didnt make your words up, but I did quote them.
mysteryman
 
  2  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 02:41 pm
@cicerone imposter,
The only problem is that the unemployment rate has gone from 7 to 10 AFTER Obama was sworn in.
So since unemployment has gotten worse since Obama was sworn in, you can honestly say that Obama is now heading the worst job creation since Hoover.
H2O MAN
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 02:56 pm
@mysteryman,
That sounds logical to me... I bet the radicals here on A2K don't get it though.
okie
 
  0  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 03:05 pm
@H2O MAN,
H2O MAN wrote:

That sounds logical to me... I bet the radicals here on A2K don't get it though.

H2OMAN, I used to think the radical left here was actually pretty intelligent, but merely biased, but I am not joking now when I am beginning to think they are really kind of mentally challenged in terms of intelligence or ability to reason. For example, I asked cicerone imposter straight out this question:
"For example, if some people pay no tax or get a net tax rebate, is it accurate to say that they would receive a tax cut if we give them a bigger rebate? Yes or No? What is your opinion about this? I am genuinely curious. How would you report this in the press if you were an honest journalist?"
He either refuses to answer it because he doesn't want to be honest, or he actually does not know the answer? I am beginning to wonder if he knows the answer? And if he sees this post of mine here, he will probably make a comment about my brain being non-existent or something. The man seems totally incapable of grasping a fact and talking about it intelligently.
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 03:33 pm
@mysteryman,
That's because you don't understand the Great Recession.
0 Replies
 
realjohnboy
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 05:19 pm
@mysteryman,
mysteryman wrote:

Are these your words?

Quote:
What Obama tax increase?
Please cite the legislation Obama signed that will raise taxes.

I think you are confused about who passed the legislation and who signed it. The GOP did. You can't blame Obama for a bill he never signed and never voted on


So you did say that Obama didnt sign any bills that raised taxes.
I didnt make your words up, but I did quote them.


I have kind of given up on various threads. The spitting is getting tiresome, but this spat still intrigues me.
Much is made of the tax cuts due to expire at the end of the year. President Bush signed off on them in 2001 and they included a sunset provision. Unless extended by Congress and signed by the President, they would expire on Dec 31, 2010. Congress, with bi-partisan ambivalence, punted until after the mid-term elections and the issue may or may not be resolved in the lame-duck session with either an extension or some new legislation. Their is a proposal out there to extend the cuts until (surprise, surprise) after the 2012 elections.
Perhaps, Mysteryman, that is a tax increase you are saying President Obama signed. But it is simply not true.
In the 2009/2010 budget he did agree to a Death Tax. If one could arrange to die in 2010 as opposed to 2011, a tax could be avoided. Was that one that you were thinking of? My understanding, though, is that any competent estate planner can circumvent that.


139947
H2O MAN
 
  -2  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 05:31 pm
@okie,
okie wrote:

H2O MAN wrote:

That sounds logical to me... I bet the radicals here on A2K don't get it though.

H2OMAN, I used to think the radical left here was actually pretty intelligent, but merely biased, but I am not joking now when I am beginning to think they are really kind of mentally challenged in terms of intelligence or ability to reason. For example, I asked cicerone imposter straight out this question:
"For example, if some people pay no tax or get a net tax rebate, is it accurate to say that they would receive a tax cut if we give them a bigger rebate? Yes or No? What is your opinion about this? I am genuinely curious. How would you report this in the press if you were an honest journalist?"
He either refuses to answer it because he doesn't want to be honest, or he actually does not know the answer? I am beginning to wonder if he knows the answer? And if he sees this post of mine here, he will probably make a comment about my brain being non-existent or something. The man seems totally incapable of grasping a fact and talking about it intelligently.


The way Obama sounds without his teleprompter, kind of mentally challenged in terms of intelligence or the ability to reason... unable to discuss a subject intelligently, devoid of all common sense. Yep, I've noticed the same thing with the radical left here.
okie
 
  -1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 06:11 pm
@H2O MAN,
This all goes back to his speech at the DNC that propelled him into the presidential running. The press chose to trump up that speech as something really special. Some or many of us did not hear anything special. What I heard was a guy speaking platitudes, and not all that well done either. I'm still scratching my head about why the press chose to trump the man up as something special, but I think Soros had much to do with how it all went down. I think the Democrats wanted to use a black as stage dressing for Hillary, but all the attention given him went to his head and it all got out of control, with Hillary eventually thrown under the bus.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  0  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 06:14 pm
@realjohnboy,
And as far as most of us know, the stim bill that Obama did sign had tax cuts in it.
mysteryman
 
  1  
Reply Sat 13 Nov, 2010 06:39 pm
@cicerone imposter,
True, the stim bill did cut some taxes.
BUT, the healthcare bill raised some taxes also.
 

Related Topics

The States Need Help - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fiscal Cliff - Question by JPB
Let GM go Bankrupt - Discussion by Woiyo9
Sovereign debt - Question by JohnJD
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.11 seconds on 07/18/2025 at 12:41:52